Talk:Broad Channel (IND Rockaway Line)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Trains / in New York City (Rated GA-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. See also: WikiProject Trains to do list
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Broad Channel (IND Rockaway Line). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:20, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Broad Channel (IND Rockaway Line)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Bob1960evens (talk · contribs) 09:21, 8 June 2017 (UTC)


I will review. I will work through the article, making notes as I go, returning to the lead at the end. Can I suggest that you indicate when issues are fixed by comments and possibly the {{Done}} template. I am not in favour of using strikethrough, as it makes the text difficult to read at a later date, and it is an important record of the GA process.

One obvious issue is the lead. This should serve to introduce and summarise the main points of the article. It is clearly too short to do this. You may like to be thinking about resolving that while I work on the review. I would expect two reasonable-sized paragraphs for an article of this length. Bob1960evens (talk) 09:21, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for taking this up. I will also help with this one.--Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 10:20, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

History[edit]

  • The station originally opened in 1880 as a New York, Woodhaven and Rockaway Railroad station (although some sources claim it opened in June 1881), that was acquired by the Long Island Rail Road and became a station on the Rockaway Beach Branch. The grammar of this sentence is not quite right. Suggest "The station originally opened in 1880 as a NY..., and was acquired by the Long Island Rail Road, to become a station on the Rockaway Beach Branch." or somesuch.

 Done

  • The historical detail of the first paragraph is excellent, but is really difficult to understand. Oh for a simple route map! In the absence of a map, one solution would be to add the former names of the two southern routes to the track layout. I presume one of them was the Rockaway Beach Branch and the other was the Far Rockaway Branch. We then need some geographical clues in the text. So "The other junction was at Hammels Station, two (?) stops to the south on the ?? Branch" and "another one known as The Raunt, the first of four stations to the north between Broad Channel and Howard Beach, " I am not sure where the Jamaica Bay tressle is, since there are three bits labelled Jamaica Bay on the track layout. Again, labelling it on the track diagram would be really helpful.

I tried fixing the map, but I am not good with that kind of stuff. User:epicgenius, the nominator, created it, but to my knowledge, is still in Rome with limited internet access. That is part of why I am dealing with this review.--Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 18:00, 8 June 2017 (UTC)  Done

  • was purchased by the New York City Transit Authority Should be "were purchased" since there are two of them.

 Done

  • In 1985, the station had only 224 paying daily riders... This is a single sentence paragraph. It could be linked to the previous paragraph. So "The station opened to subway service on June 28, 1956, but was never very busy. In 1985..."

 Done

  • farebeaters This is not a term I know. Can it be expanded a little?

 Done

Station layout[edit]

  • The platforms are sheltered with canopies and windscreens. This is only partially true, judging by the images, which mostly show platforms without canopies. Suggest "The platforms are sheltered with canopies and windscreens to the north (south?) of the station house." or somesuch.

 Done

  • The station house originally had 1950s-era signage... Suggest "The station house used to have 1950s-era signage..." to avoid two "originally"s is quick succession, unless you have a date for the change. Was it part of the 2012/13 repairs, for instance?

 Done

Track layout
  • while eastern track is long enough for one full-length train... Should be "while the eastern track". We also need to know how long a full-length train is. 2 cars? 4 cars? 8 cars?

 Done

  • So is 600 ft 8 cars or 9?
  • Punch boxes are located at the ends of both platforms, to allow train operators to select the correct route. Is this fully automatic, in that pressing the buttons alters the switches, or does it notify someone else who controls the switches? Maybe we don't know. Either way, just a few more words to explain what is going on here would be helpful.

 Done

Ridership[edit]

  • It was only trailed by a closed station, ... This needs expanding. Suggest you name the station, and explain that it is temporarily closed for reconstruction, or it seems self-evident that a closed station will have less riders than an open one. Presumably we have no figures for the number of riders who switch to the shuttle here, but the text suggests it is far in excess of the 310 who exit from the subway here.

 Done

  • Nearby points of interest include ... This is another single sentence paragraph. Could it be expanded by details of the visitor center, and what visitors can see at the Wildlife Refuge?

 Done

Captions[edit]

  • The captions are very terse. For the reconstruction, details of whether we are looking north or south would help.

 Done

  • Crossovers to tail (right) and test tracks I am not sure what Crossovers to tail means. Again a few more words would help.

 Done

  • Reopening, with an R1 leading a special excursion. Are R1 cars the trains normally used on the route, or was this a special? If there were excursions to celebrate the re-opening, this should probably also be mentioned at the end of the history section.

 Done

Lead[edit]

  • I have already mentioned that this needs expanding a little to summarise the main points of the article.

 Done

I will work my way through the references next. Back soon. Bob1960evens (talk) 10:33, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

References[edit]

  • I have checked through most of the references, although there are a few that require a newspaper subscription to access the full text. They generally support the text as written. There are five which refer to multi-page pdf documents, which need page numbers adding.
  • Ref 16 Broad Channel: a future land use proposal - 116 pages

 Done

  • Ref 17 Review of the A and C Lines - 79 pages

 Done

  • Ref 24 EPRI-DOE Handbook of Energy Storage for Transmission... - 512 pages

 Done

  • Ref 25 BATTERY POWER SYSTEM FOR TRACKSIDE ENERGY STORGE - 42 pages

 Done

  • Ref 26 Handbook of Energy Storage for Transmission... - 300 pages

 Done

In addition:

  • Ref 31 Facts and Figures: Subway Ridership shows that for 2015, Beach 105 St had less riders than Broad Channel, at 305 as against 310. This should be reflected in the article.

 Done

  • Ref 32 Safest and riskiest areas of New York's subway system... mentions that there are around 2,700 daily transfers at the station, although the figures are not as precise as those for ridership, and that the platforms are often packed as a result. This may be worth adding in.

 Done

  • Ref 23 Kinetic energy storage wins acceptance includes some fascinating stuff about what happens on the test track, and if such details are not included in some other article on the NY Subway, would make an interesting addition to this article. It is not, however, a requirement for GA.

 Done

The formal bit[edit]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
    See comments above
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
    See comments above
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
    See note on test track for future reference
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:

I have now finished reviewing the article. In view of the rapid response to issues so far, I will not be putting the article on hold, and will only do so if there is no further movement. Bob1960evens (talk) 15:23, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

I think that I have adequately resolved all the aforementioned issues. Thank you again.--Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 18:01, 8 June 2017 (UTC)
I have made a few minor edits, to make the ridership a bit clearer, fix a typo, remove duplicate page numbers on ref 25, avoid the length of the test track being converted as both 3000m and 3.2km, and to mention the re-opening train. You may like to check that you are happy with those.
I agree that the issues have all been resolved and am pleased to be able to award the article GA status. Thanks again for the speedy response to the review. Bob1960evens (talk) 08:48, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
Thank you again. Since it is near the end of the school year, there is more time to do this. I had no school yesterday for Brooklyn-Queens Day.--Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 09:22, 9 June 2017 (UTC)